A lot of people were suggesting on other sites that SVB collapsed because a lot of money was held in government bonds and was hard to liquidate because of the rise in interest rates. If that was the case, why was there no facility for the bonds to just be bought back and instead the bank had to collapse into a bigger one that could make more profit from it (or have a greater burden themselves).
It is possible to liquidate it at a loss, but the problem was in the attacks of depositors’ requests to withdraw their money, it is 42 billion in one day, and most of the treasury certificates can be liquidated, but at a discount because the return from them is low compared to the return from the certificates that were issued after raising interest rates, so it must To give the buyer a discount, otherwise it will not be sold (for example, certificates worth $1000 must be sold at $900)
As for why the government did not intervene, its direct intervention means light to all bank boards of directors to create chaos as they wish, and the government will solve all their problems.
Roughly the same problem occurred in China with Evergrande
[1][1]
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58579833